Athanasius: On the Incarnation

κατὰ τοῦ πυρός κατὰ appears to have the predicative force so common in Aristotle. The Bened. translation ‘the weakness of fire against the asbestos’ is based on a needless conjecture.

§29. Here then are wonderful effects, and a sufficient cause, the Cross, to account for them, as sunrise accounts for daylight.

§30. The reality of the resurrection proved by facts: (1) the victory over death described above: (2) the Wonders of Grace are the work of One Living, of One who is God: (3) if the gods be (as alleged) real and living, a fortiori He Who shatters their power is alive.

§31. If Power is the sign of life, what do we learn from the impotence of idols, for good or evil, and the constraining power of Christ and of the Sign of the Cross? Death and the demons are by this proved to have lost their sovereignty. Coincidence of the above argument from facts with that from the Personality of Christ.

Heb. iv. 12.

§32. But who is to see Him risen, so as to believe? Nay, God is ever invisible and known by His works only: and here the works cry out in proof. If you do not believe, look at those who do, and perceive the Godhead of Christ. The demons see this, though men be blind. Summary of the argument so far.

Cf. Luc. iv. 34, and Marc. v. 7.

§33. Unbelief of Jews and scoffing of Greeks. The former confounded by their own Scriptures. Prophecies of His coming as God and as Man.

Matt. i. 23; Isa. vii. 14.

Num. xxiv. 5–17.

Isa. viii. 4.

Isa. xix. 1.

Hos. xi. 1.

§34. Prophecies of His passion and death in all its circumstances.

Isa. liii. 3, sqq.

Or, “exalted.”

τὴν ὑπὲρ αὐτου δύναμιν. The Ben. version simplifies this difficult expression by ignoring the ὑπερ. Mr. E. N. Bennett has suggested to me that the true reading may be ὑπερά& 203·λον for ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ (ἄϋλος supra 8. 1, ὑπεραὺλως in Philo). I would add the suggestion that αὐτοῦ stood after ὑπεράυλον, and that the similarity of the five letters in ms. caused the second word to be dropped out. ‘His exceeding immaterial power’ would be the resulting sense. (See Class. Review, 1890, No. iv. p. 182.)

Or, “exalted.”

§35. Prophecies of the Cross. How these prophecies are satisfied in Christ alone.

Deut. xxviii. 66, see Orat ii. 16, note 1.

Jer. xi. 19.

Properly “let us destroy the tree with its bread” (i.e. fruit). The LXX, translate belahmô ‘upon his bread,’ which is possible in itself; but they either mistook the verb, or followed some wrong reading. Their rendering is followed by all the Latin versions. For a comment on the latter see Tertull. adv. Marc. iii. 19, iv. 40.

Ps. xxii. 16, sqq.

Isa. xi. 10.

Or ‘only after he had grown great,’ i.e. to man’s estate.

§36. Prophecies of Christ’s sovereignty, flight into Egypt, &c.

Isa. viii. 4, where note LXX.

Cf. Letter 61. 4.

§37. Psalm xxii. 16, &c. Majesty of His birth and death. Confusion of oracles and demons in Egypt.

Cf. 35. 2, and 34. 3.

§38. Other clear prophecies of the coming of God in the flesh. Christ’s miracles unprecedented.

Isa. lxv. 1, 2; cf. Rom. x. 20, sq.

Isa. xxxv. 3, sqq.

John ix. 32, sq.

§39. Do you look for another? But Daniel foretells the exact time. Objections to this removed.

Dan. ix. 24, sq.

Lit. “answer,” a misrendering of the Hebrew.

§40. Argument (1) from the withdrawal of prophecy and destruction of Jerusalem, (2) from the conversion of the Gentiles, and that to the God of Moses. What more remains for the Messiah to do, that Christ has not done?

Gen. xlix. 10.

Matt. xi. 13. cf. Luc. xvi. 16.

Cf. Ps. cxviii. 27, and for the literal sense, Num. vi. 25

Ps. cvii. 20.

Isa. lxiii. 9 (LXX.), and the note in the (Queen’s Printers’) ‘Variorum’ Bible.

§41. Answer to the Greeks. Do they recognise the Logos? If He manifests Himself in the organism of the Universe, why not in one Body? for a human body is a part of the same whole.

Athan. here assumes, for the purpose of his argument, the principles of the Neo-platonist schools. They were influenced, in regard to the Logos, by Philo, but even on this subject the germ of their teaching may be traced in Plato, especially in the Timæus, (See Drummond’s Philo, i. 65–88, Bigg’s Bamp. Lect. 14, 18, 248–253, and St. Aug. Confess. in ‘Nicene Fathers,’ Series 1, vol. 1, p. 107 and notes.)

Especially Plato, Tim. 30, &c.

ἐπιβεβηκέναι, cf. above, 20. 4, 6. The Union of God and Man in Christ is of course ‘hypostatic’ or personal, and thus (supra 17. 1), different in kind from the union of the Word with Creation. His argument is ad homines. It was not for thinkers who identified the Universe with God to take exception to the idea of Incarnation.

§42. His union with the body is based upon His relation to Creation as a whole. He used a human body, since to man it was that He wished to reveal Himself.

See Acts xvii. 28.

ἐπιβαίνων, see supra, note 3.

The superfluous πεποιηκέναι is ignored, being untranslateable as the text stands. For a less simple conjecture, see the Bened. note.

§43. He came in human rather than in any nobler form, because (I) He came to save, not to impress ; (2) man alone of creatures had sinned. As men would not recognise His works in the Universe, He came and worked among them as Man; in the sphere to which they had limited themselves.

This thought is beautifully expressed by Keble :— ‘All true, all faultless, all in tune, Creation’s wondrous choir Opened in mystic unison, to last till time expire. And still it lasts: by day and night with one consenting voice All hymn Thy glory Lord, aright, all worship and rejoice: Man only mars the sweet accord”…. (‘Christian Year,’ Fourth Sunday after Trinity.)

Cf. 41. 5, note 3.

Cf. Orig. c. Cels. vi. 64, where there is the same contrast between μετέχειν and μετέχεσθαι

Ath. paraphrases loosely Plat. Politic. 273 D. See Jowett’s Plato (ed. 2) vol. iv. pp. 515, 553.

Lit. “sate down,” as four lines above.

§44. As God made man by a word, why not restore him by a word? But (1) creation out of nothing is different from reparation of what already exists. (2) Man was there with a definite need, calling for a definite remedy. Death was ingrained in man’s nature: He then must wind life closely to human nature. Therefore the Word became Incarnate that He might meet and conquer death in His usurped territory. (Simile of straw and asbestos.)

With this discussion compare that upon ‘repentance’ above 7. (esp. 7. 4).

Restoration by a mere fiat would have shewn God’s power, the Incarnation shews His Love. See Orat. i. 52, note 1, ii. 68, note 1.

Cf. Orat. i. 56, note 5, 65, note 3.

See above 28. 3. He appears not to have seen the substance.

§45. Thus once again every part of creation manifests the glory of God. Nature, the witness to her Creator, yields (by miracles) a second testimony to God Incarnate. The witness of Nature, perverted by man’s sin, was thus forced back to truth. If these reasons suffice not, let the Greeks look at facts.

Isa. xi. 9. For the arguments, compare §§11–14.

See Döllinger, Gentile and Jew, i. 449.

Col. ii. 15.

The Incarnation completes the circle of God’s self-witness and of man’s responsibility.

§46. Discredit, from the date of the Incarnation, of idol-cultus, oracles, mythologies, demoniacal energy, magic, and Gentile philosophy. And whereas the old cults were strictly local and independent, the worship of Christ is catholic and uniform.

Cf. notes on c. Gent. 10, and 12. 2.

On the following argument see Döllinger ii. 210 sqq., and Bigg, Bampt. Lect. 248, note 1.

On the local character of ancient religions, see Döllinger i. 109, &c., and Coulanges, La Cité Antique, Book III. ch. vi., and V. iii. (the substance in Barker’s Aryan Civilisation).

§47. The numerous oracles,—fancied apparitions in sacred places, &c., dispelled by the sign of the Cross. The old gods prove to have been mere men. Magic is exposed. And whereas Philosophy could only persuade select and local cliques of Immortality, and goodness,—men of little intellect have infused into the multitudes of the churches the principle of a supernatural life.

On these, see Döllinger, i. 216, &c., and Milton’s Ode on the Nativity, stanza xix.

i.e. that of Trophonius.

Patara.

Ammon.

See Döllinger, i. 73, 164–70: the Cabiri were pre-Hellenic deities, worshipped in many ancient sanctuaries, but principally in Samothrace and Lemnos.

Cf. Vit. Ant. xvi.–xliii., also Döllinger, ii. 212, and a curious catena of extracts from early Fathers, collected by Hurter in ‘Opuscula SS. Patrum Selecta,’ vol. 1, appendix.

For this opinion, see note 1 on c. Gent. 12.

See Döllinger, ii. 210, and (on Julian) 215.

In Plato’s ideal Republic, the notion of any direct influence of the highest ideals upon the masses is quite absent. Their happiness is to be in passive obedience to the few whom those ideals inspire. (Contrast Isa. liv. 13, Jer. xxxi. 34.)

§48. Further facts. Christian continence of virgins and ascetics. Martyrs. The power of the Cross against demons and magic. Christ by His Power shews Himself more than a man, more than a magician, more than a spirit. For all these are totally subject to Him. Therefore He is the Word of God.

Cf. Hist. Arian. 25, Apol. Const. 33.

§49. His Birth and Miracles. You call Asclepius, Heracles, and Dionysus gods for their works. Contrast their works with His, and the wonders at His death, &c.

§50. Impotence and rivalries of the Sophists put to shame by the Death of Christ. His Resurrection unparalleled even in Greek legend.

e.g. Iamblichus, &c., cf. Introd. to c. Gent.

§51. The new virtue of continence. Revolution of Society, purified and pacified by Christianity.

Cf. Thucy. i. 5 6: ‘πᾶσα γὰρ ἡ ῞Ελλας ἐσιδηροφόρει,’ &c.

§52. Wars, &c., roused by demons, lulled by Christianity.

Isa. ii. 4.

St. Augustine, Civ. D. IV. xvi. commenting on the fact that the temple of ‘Repose’ (Quies) at Rome was not within the city walls, suggests ‘qui illam turbam colere perseveraret…dœmoniorum, eum Quietem habere non posse.’

§53. The whole fabric of Gentilism levelled at a blow by Christ secretly addressing the conscience of Man.

1 Cor. ii. 8.

§54. The Word Incarnate, as is the case with the Invisible God, is known to us by His works. By them we recognise His deifying mission. Let us be content to enumerate a few of them, leaving their dazzling plentitude to him who will behold.

θεοποιηθῶμεν. See Orat. ii. 70, note 1, and many other passages in those Discourses, as well as Letters 60. 4, 61. 2. (Eucharistic reference), de Synodis 51, note 7. (Compare also Iren. IV. xxxviii. 4, ‘non ab initio dii facti sumus, sed primo quidem homines, tunc demum dii,’ cf. ib. præf. 4. fin. also V. ix. 2, ‘sublevat in vitam Dei.’ Origen Cels. iii. 28 fin. touches the same thought, but Ath. is here in closer affinity to the idea of Irenæus than to that of Origen.) The New Test. reference is 2 Pet. i. 4, rather than Heb. ii. 9 sqq; the Old Test., Ps. lxxxii. 6, which seems to underlie Orat. iii. 25 (note 5).

In spite of the last mentioned passage, ‘God’ is far preferable as a rendering, in most places, to ‘gods,’ which has heathenish associations. To us (1 Cor. viii. 6) there are no such things as ‘gods.’ (The best summary of patristic teaching on this subject is given by Harnack Dg. ii. p. 46 note.)

§55. Summary of foregoing. Cessation of pagan oracles, &c.: propagation of the faith. The true King has come forth and silenced all usurpers.

§56. Search then, the Scriptures, if you can, and so fill up this sketch. Learn to look for the Second Advent and Judgment.

Matt. xxvi. 64.

Cf. Matt. xxiv. 42; Marc. xiii. 35.

2 Cor. v. 10; cf. Rom. xiv. 10.

§57. Above all, so live that you may have the right to eat of this tree of knowledge and life, and so come to eternal joys. Doxology.

1 Cor. ii. 9.